Children and Young Persons (Amendment) Bill (Hansard, 2 May 1986)

§ Ms. Richardson
This has been a most interesting debate. The hon. Member for Westbury (Mr. Walters) has raised an interesting point about the grandparents of an illegitimate child who are the parents of the putative father. That supports the theory that I think is shared by my hon. Friend the Member for Peckham (Ms. Harman) that, while we think it right that grandparents, if they so wish, can make an application, so can other people, and the court would deal with any frivolous applications.

§ Ms. Harman
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is sad and inappropriate that the hon. Member for Westbury (Mr. Walters), having raised this important point about the grandparents of the illegitimate child, should be talking about amendments that might have to be made in the other place to clarify the position? If the Bill had been dealt with 1213 properly by the Government, those points would have been raised in Committee and then we would have been clearing it up now and making the situation satisfactory on Report. The hon. Member for Westbury does not sit in the other place. Therefore, does he support the point made earlier, that the Bill has been hijacked by the Government and taken out of his control?

§ Ms. Richardson
I am glad that my hon. Friend has raised that point. I was not on the Committee, being engaged in Committee on the Social Security Bill, but I have read the debate. It seems to me from the remarks that the hon. Member for Westbury has just made that it has just occurred to him that the Bill is being stitched together as we go along. Bits are being snipped out and other bits are being stitched in. That may be the tradition in legislation, but it is normally a process carried out in Committee. It is rather strange that, in effect, we are having a Committee on the Floor of the House, with new ideas being trailed, and this is not necessarily the right time to deal with them.
I support legal aid. I speak as a lay person. I have never been a magistrate, and I have great admiration for those who have devoted much of their spare time to that valuable work. I am not a lawyer like my hon. Friend the Member for Peckham—I am a lay person in every sense of the word. However, I have had complaints, not on child care, but on other subjects, about the difficulties that some people have in getting legal aid in magistrates courts. They are not necessarily refused legal aid, but they do not know about it and it is not pointed out to them.
A few years ago, I had a long and somewhat acrimonious discussion with the now retired clerk of my local magistrates court. I discovered that Barking magistrates court was towards the bottom of the league table of legal aid granted in courts. I tried to find out why. The clerk was frank and said that he wanted to save the Crown money. My reaction was that it was not for him to make that decision. If people qualify for legal aid they must be encouraged and shown how to claim it.
The amendment suggested by the Family Rights Group attempts to ensure that people made parties to care proceedings are entitled to apply for legal aid. The group says that its case work with parents prior to the introduction of legal aid for parents in care proceedings showed that a right to participate was an empty right unless parents were able to obtain legal representation.
I can see that the provision might create a field day for the legal profession, but not many people would apply. I can see the nub of the concern, but the problem is overplayed. Against the possibility of lining solicitors' pockets, we must set the rights of, and the responsibilities which we have towards, people making application to a court to be parties in care proceedings.

§ Mr. Chris Smith (Islington, South and Finsbury)
It is crucial in such proceedings to ensure that those who are party have access to the best representation. Is it not therefore vital that the new clause be included in the Bill?

§ Ms. Richardson
I agree that the new clause is necessary. No one is in a worse position than the person who is not represented or who is represented by someone not of their choice and given at the last moment. I know that the proposal is costly, but it is a cost that we must 1214 bear. The rights of people must be made known. People should be able to engage the person with whom they feel most comfortable. In a court action, the person acting for the party must command trust. I support the new clause.

§ Mr. Whitney
The Government amendments, specifically amendment No. 23, make it clear that legal aid would be provided for parents, guardians and grandparents who are made parties in such cases. The word "guardian" means, not a legal guardian, but is as defined in the 1933 Act which states:
any person who in the opinion of the court … has for the time being the charge of or control over the child. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Westbury (Mr. Walters) for his remarks about how we were able to co-operate. We shall consider what he said, including his remarks about the illegitimate child. The rules of court will be outlined in the House of Lords. The consultation process, in particular with the rules committee, might take a little time. The matter is the Home Secretary's responsibility, but I shall pass on my hon. Friend's comments.